I am crossposting this Daily Kos diary by Geekesque at DK with permission: What Obama actually said about fighting terrorism.
Crossposted diary follows. If you have questions, it would be preferable to post them in Geekesque’s original diary at DKos.
~~~~~~
What Obama actually said about fighting terrorism
by Geekesque, Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 07:51:41 AM PDT
Barack Obama was scheduled to give a speech today on his national security/defense/anti-terrorism policy today.
There’s going to be a lot of distortion of what he said, so I thought I’d launch a ‘preemptive strike’ and detail what he’s actually saying.
The details below the fold.
(Note, when the actual speech is given, I’ll update accordingly)
UPDATE: Here is a link for the entire speech: http://www.barackobama.com/…
ABC news has the most detailed advance synopsis of the remarks.
The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder
They are: has additional useful information and discussion.
His overall approach in general:
And worse — he is fighting the war the terrorists want us to fight. Bin Ladin and his allies know they cannot defeat us on the field of battle or in a genuine battle of ideas. But they can provoke the reaction we’ve seen in Iraq: a misguided invasion of a Muslim country that sparks new insurgencies, ties down our military, busts our budgets, increases the pool of terrorist recruits, alienates America, gives democracy a bad name, and prompts the American people to question our engagement in the world.
By refusing to end the war in Iraq, President Bush is giving the terrorists what they really want, and what the Congress voted to give them in 2002: a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.
It is time to turn the page. When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world’s most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.
Obama’s approach consists of five pillars:
- Improving diplomacy and improve our image abroad for the purpose of aiding counterterrorism and counterproliferation efforts. Obama has been a key player in Senate counterproliferation efforts, and he has effectively positioned himself as the candidate for change from Bush’s approach when it comes to international diplomacy.
And I won’t hesitate to use the power of American diplomacy to stop countries from obtaining these weapons or sponsoring terror. The lesson of the Bush years is that not talking does not work. Go down the list of countries we’ve ignored and see how successful that strategy has been. We haven’t talked to Iran, and they continue to build their nuclear program. We haven’t talked to Syria, and they continue support for terror. We tried not talking to North Korea, and they now have enough material for 6 to 8 more nuclear weapons.
It’s time to turn the page on the diplomacy of tough talk and no action. It’s time to turn the page on Washington’s conventional wisdom that agreement must be reached before you meet, that talking to other countries is some kind of reward, and that Presidents can only meet with people who will tell them what they want to hear.
President Kennedy said it best: “Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate.” Only by knowing your adversary can you defeat them or drive wedges between them. As President, I will work with our friend and allies, but I won’t outsource our diplomacy in Tehran to the Europeans, or our diplomacy in Pyongyang to the Chinese. I will do the careful preparation needed, and let these countries know where America stands. They will no longer have the excuse of American intransigence. They will have our terms: no support for terror and no nuclear weapons.
But America must be about more than taking out terrorists and locking up weapons, or else new terrorists will rise up to take the place of every one we capture or kill. That is why the third step in my strategy will be drying up the rising well of support for extremism.
And we know what the extremists say about us. America is just an occupying Army in Muslim lands, the shadow of a shrouded figure standing on a box at Abu Ghraib, the power behind the throne of a repressive leader. They say we are at war with Islam. That is the whispered line of the extremist who has nothing to offer in this battle of ideas but blame — blame America, blame progress, blame Jews. And often he offers something along with the hate. A sense of empowerment. Maybe an education at a madrasa, some charity for your family, some basic services in the neighborhood. And then: a mission and a gun.
We know we are not who they say we are. America is at war with terrorists who killed on our soil. We are not at war with Islam. America is a compassionate nation that wants a better future for all people. The vast majority of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims have no use for bin Ladin or his bankrupt ideas. But too often since 9/11, the extremists have defined us, not the other way around.
When I am President, that will change. We will author our own story.
We do need to stand for democracy. And I will. But democracy is about more than a ballot box. America must show — through deeds as well as words — that we stand with those who seek a better life. That child looking up at the helicopter must see America and feel hope.
As President, I will make it a focus of my foreign policy to roll back the tide of hopelessness that gives rise to hate. Freedom must mean freedom from fear, not the freedom of anarchy. I will never shrug my shoulders and say — as Secretary Rumsfeld did — “Freedom is untidy.” I will focus our support on helping nations build independent judicial systems, honest police forces, and financial systems that are transparent and accountable. Freedom must also mean freedom from want, not freedom lost to an empty stomach. So I will make poverty reduction a key part of helping other nations reduce anarchy.
I will double our annual investments to meet these challenges to $50 billion by 2012. And I will support a $2 billion Global Education Fund to counter the radical madrasas — often funded by money from within Saudi Arabia — that have filled young minds with messages of hate. We must work for a world where every child, everywhere, is taught to build and not to destroy. And as we lead we will ask for more from our friends in Europe and Asia as well — more support for our diplomacy, more support for multilateral peacekeeping, and more support to rebuild societies ravaged by conflict.
I will also launch a program of public diplomacy that is a coordinated effort across my Administration, not a small group of political officials at the State Department explaining a misguided war. We will open “America Houses” in cities across the Islamic world, with Internet, libraries, English lessons, stories of America’s Muslims and the strength they add to our country, and vocational programs. Through a new ” America’s Voice Corps” we will recruit, train, and send out into the field talented young Americans who can speak with — and listen to — the people who today hear about us only from our enemies.
As President, I will lead this effort. In the first 100 days of my Administration, I will travel to a major Islamic forum and deliver an address to redefine our struggle. I will make clear that we are not at war with Islam, that we will stand with those who are willing to stand up for their future, and that we need their effort to defeat the prophets of hate and violence. I will speak directly to that child who looks up at that helicopter, and my message will be clear: “You matter to us. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.”
- Creating a $5 billion Shared Security Partnership Program that he will say will “forge an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to take down terrorist networks around the globe.”The most effective tool we have against terrorism is cooperating with other nations in terms of intelligence gathering and utilizing law enforcement resources. This goes hand-in-hand with the emphasis on outreach and dialogue with the world community.
To succeed, we must improve our civilian capacity. The finest military in the world is adapting to the challenges of the 21st century. But it cannot counter insurgent and terrorist threats without civilian counterparts who can carry out economic and political reconstruction missions — sometimes in dangerous places. As President, I will strengthen these civilian capacities, recruiting our best and brightest to take on this challenge. I will increase both the numbers and capabilities of our diplomats, development experts, and other civilians who can work alongside our military. We can’t just say there is no military solution to these problems. We need to integrate all aspects of American might.
One component of this integrated approach will be new Mobile Development Teams that bring together personnel from the State Department, the Pentagon, and USAID. These teams will work with civil society and local governments to make an immediate impact in peoples’ lives, and to turn the tide against extremism. Where people are most vulnerable, where the light of hope has grown dark, and where we are in a position to make a real difference in advancing security and opportunity — that is where these teams will go.
I will also strengthen our intelligence. This is about more than an organizational chart. We need leadership that forces our agencies to share information, and leadership that never — ever — twists the facts to support bad policies. But we must also build our capacity to better collect and analyze information, and to carry out operations to disrupt terrorist plots and break up terrorist networks.
This cannot just be an American mission. Al Qaeda and its allies operate in nearly 100 countries. The United States cannot steal every secret, penetrate every cell, act on every tip, or track down every terrorist — nor should we have to do this alone. This is not just about our security. It is about the common security of all the world.
As President, I will create a Shared Security Partnership Program to forge an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to take down terrorist networks from the remote islands of Indonesia, to the sprawling cities of Africa. This program will provide $5 billion over three years for counter-terrorism cooperation with countries around the world, including information sharing, funding for training, operations, border security, anti-corruption programs, technology, and targeting terrorist financing. And this effort will focus on helping our partners succeed without repressive tactics, because brutality breeds terror, it does not defeat it.
We must also do more to safeguard the world’s most dangerous weapons. We know al Qaeda seeks a nuclear weapon. We know they would not hesitate to use one. Yet there is still about 50 tons of highly enriched uranium, some of it poorly secured, at civilian nuclear facilities in over forty countries. There are still about 15,000 to 16,00 nuclear weapons and stockpiles of uranium and plutonium scattered across 11 time zones in the former Soviet Union.
That is why I worked in the Senate with Dick Lugar to pass a law that would help the United States and our allies detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. That is why I am introducing a bill with Chuck Hagel that seeks to prevent nuclear terrorism, reduce global nuclear arsenals, and stop the spread of nuclear weapons. And that is why, as President, I will lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons and material at vulnerable sites within four years. While we work to secure existing stockpiles, we should also negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material.
- Restoring our values. This is an important point: not only are torture and ‘extraordinary’ renditions bad for our nation’s character and soul, they also make us less safe by delegitimizing us and our agenda across the world, thus decreasing other nations’ willingness to cooperate with us (see also points 1 & 2 above).
I also will reject a legal framework that does not work. There has been only one conviction at Guantanamo. It was for a guilty plea on material support for terrorism. The sentence was 9 months. There has not been one conviction of a terrorist act. I have faith in America’s courts, and I have faith in our JAGs. As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists.
This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.
That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.
- Securing a more resilient homeland. It’s sad that six years ex post 9/11 we still have to include this as an agenda item.
Too often this Administration’s approach to homeland security has been to scatter money around and avoid hard choices, or to scare Americans without telling them what to be scared of, or what to do. A Department set up to make Americans feel safer didn’t even show up when bodies drifted through the streets in New Orleans. That’s not acceptable.
My Administration will take an approach to homeland security guided by risk. I will establish a Quadrennial Review at the Department of Homeland Security — just like at the Pentagon — to undertake a top to bottom review of the threats we face and our ability to confront them. And I will develop a comprehensive National Infrastructure Protection Plan that draws on both local know-how and national priorities.
We have to put resources where our infrastructure is most vulnerable. That means tough and permanent standards for securing our chemical plants. Improving our capability to screen cargo and investing in safeguards that will prevent the disruption of our ports. And making sure our energy sector — our refineries and pipelines and power grids — is protected so that terrorists cannot cripple our economy.
We also have to get past a top-down approach. Folks across America are the ones on the front lines. On 9/11, it was citizens — empowered by their knowledge of the World Trade Center attacks — who protected our government by heroically taking action on Flight 93 to keep it from reaching our nation’s capital. When I have information that can empower Americans, I will share it with them.
Information sharing with state and local governments must be a two-way street, because we never know where the two pieces of the puzzle are that might fit together — the tip from Afghanistan, and the cop who sees something suspicious on Michigan Avenue. I will increase funding to help train police to gather information and connect it to the intelligence they receive from the federal government. I will address the problem in our prisons, where the most disaffected and disconnected Americans are being explicitly targeted for conversion by al Qaeda and its ideological allies.
And my Administration will not permit more lives to be lost because emergency responders are not outfitted with the communications capability and protective equipment their job requires, or because the federal government is too slow to respond when disaster strikes. We’ve been through that on 9/11. We’ve been through it during Katrina. I will ensure that we have the resources and competent federal leadership we need to support our communities when American lives are at stake.
- Withdrawing from Iraq and refocusing on Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is where most of the media will focus its attention (because the military stuff is just cooler, I guess). Obama stresses that Islamic radicalism is the major national security threat to us (besides global warming). This is something upon which most Democrats agree, but doesn’t get discussed very frequently.
In ending the war, we must act with more wisdom than we started it. That is why my plan would maintain sufficient forces in the region to target al Qaeda within Iraq. But we must recognize that al Qaeda is not the primary source of violence in Iraq, and has little support — not from Shia and Kurds who al Qaeda has targeted, or Sunni tribes hostile to foreigners. On the contrary, al Qaeda’s appeal within Iraq is enhanced by our troop presence.
Ending the war will help isolate al Qaeda and give Iraqis the incentive and opportunity to take them out. It will also allow us to direct badly needed resources to Afghanistan. Our troops have fought valiantly there, but Iraq has deprived them of the support they need—and deserve. As a result, parts of Afghanistan are falling into the hands of the Taliban, and a mix of terrorism, drugs, and corruption threatens to overwhelm the country.
As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO’s efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations.
We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military — it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.
The media is already going ape over his renewed emphasis on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama plans to deploy 1-2 extra brigades to fight the Taliban, who are having their own Surge while Bush obsesses with Iraq.
Obama also makes it clear that Pakistan’s acquiescence in the embryonic Al-Qaeda/Taliban state within its borders–the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan–is simply unacceptable.
Obama’s speech notes that:
“I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges, but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
Say what? What’s that about a meeting in 2005?
Obama’s mention of an “al Qaeda leadership meeting” refers to a classified military operation planned in early 2005 to kill al Qaeda leaders including Osama bin Laden’s top deputy Ayman al-Zawahri in Pakistan’s tribal regions. First reported in The New York Times earlier this month, the mission was “aborted at the last minute after top Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan, according to intelligence and military officials.”
Hmmmm. Maybe ABC should run a docudrama showing a Bush administration official deciding to protect al-Zawahiri and his crew.
Crucially, #5 is predicated upon getting us the hell out of Iraq. Obama intends to redeploy troops from Iraq to fight the right fight.
Obama also advocates spending an additional $1 Billion in non-military aid to help stabilize Afghanistan.
Of course, there’s going to be a TON of crap in the media along a few false lines:
a. Obama wants to ‘invade’ Pakistan. No, that’s not accurate. What he said was:
If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.
You won’t find anyone in the Democratic field (except Kucinich and maybe Gravel) who would say that if they had a chance to take bin Laden or al-Zawahiri out, they’d hesitate to do so.
Bush’s neglect of Afghanistan, the Taliban, and the real Al-Qaeda has been criminal. There is a real danger of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban of reclaiming Afghanistan and having their own state. That we cannot allow.
At the same time, you’ll note that nowhere does Obama talk about ‘invading’ Pakistan. The very notion that dropping a bomb on an Al-Qaeda nest in the mountains is an invasion is stupidity, pure and simple.
- That it’s bizarre for someone who believes in diplomacy and opposed the Iraq war to advocate tough measures against terrorists. This is part of the nonsensical rightwing framing of sane people as wimps who won’t protect America.
The ABC web page title encapsulates both hackish notions: “Obama, Now The Anti-War Candidate Wants to Invade Another Country.”
Of course, the Republicans had a devastating attack:
The Republican National Committee pre-sponded to Obama this morning by claiming that he has a “weak” record on national security
Yes, someone who believes in making America safer instead of enriching oil companies has a ‘weak’ record according to those bozos.
Not everyone in the Democratic party is going to like this speech. Those from Kucinich on left will likely criticize it as “Bush/Cheney Light.” I would disagree strongly, noting that each and every one of the five pillars of this plan represents a reversal of Bush’s policies.
UPDATE: The actual speech itself does not mention invading or even sending troops into Pakistan. Here is what it says:
As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.
I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.
